On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 10:50:03AM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> From: "Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton" <lkcl@samba-tng.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 8:55 AM
>
>
> > > You miss my point. We at _least_ need to return a "Windows Acceptable Pipe
Name", instead
> > > of some /PIPE/pluming style name.
> >
> > it is *important* that NT-style conventions are followed.
>
> ... internally
uhh... okay.
okay, it's important to me, given what i would like to achieve.
i explain below. sorry for not having mentioned it earlier.
> > the 'guiding light' *must* be the NT functions.
>
> No, the 'internal light' must be the platform-appropriate function.
>
> > i know that most of you may find this difficult to accept that
> > microsoft may be able to develop an API that's really useful,
> > and may feel 'tempted' to 'do better' by imposing 'unixy
> > style' conventions.
> >
> > please don't.
>
> We aren't. And you sir, are presuming that NT is the only 'obscure' platform
> out there. It isn't.
i wasn't, but i didn't say that, so you weren't to know, so i stand
corrected for not communicating enough.
> I'm suggesting that we pass a pipe name to create/locate a pipe. No hokey pathing,
> simply a pipe name that will be normalized \\.\PIPE\name or /dev/pipe/apr/name (or
> however it ought to be named on win32.)
what i have been hinting at, and planning, is that i will actually
provide, with the TNG architecture, is the FULL \\servername\\PIPE\pipename
functionality. yes, that's right: i will write code that redirects
to TNG, which will farm out the data over SMB over to a remote
system FOR you.
that's right: a unix apr application will be able to connect to
a *remote* NT apr server. that's *remote* platform independence,
not just local platform independence.
and if you don't expose the full pipe-name in the APR api, i can't
do that.
> And return an opaque structure that the
> platform may us to open handles on that pipe using an apr_filepipe_open() call.
ack to that.
> > you may be used to doing this the other way round: making NT do
> > what unix does.
>
> We aren't, we all agree that lcd coding is required on apr, and we offer extensions
> where they are needed.
>
> Heck, why could even accept unix "/dev/pipe/name" as a pipe, but it would be morphed
> into "\\.\PIPE\dev_pipe_name" in order to serve the data.
>
> > and if that means creating files like /tmp/.apr-socket/\PIPE\samr with
> > backslashes in them and i _know_ this _is_ possible to do on unix,
> > and i _know_ that there are no problems with doing so because winbindd
> > does it [i have a directory /home/DOMAIN\administrator on my linux
> > hard disk and even an entry in /etc/passwd to match it] then so be it.
>
> Why not simply a pipe name, and leave pathing to apr? Justification?
see above.
does that help?
luke